Library Referendum Ballot Question

Submitted by hapl webmaster on Tue, 09/02/2008 - 12:33pm

Ballot Wording		What Does This Mean?

Recent changes in Illinois law makes it mandatory to use the following language for the referendum question. There will be one slight difference on the Kane County ballot because of our split county lines. Kane County will have different dollar values in section (1) based on the square miles of the library district within Kane County boundaries. However, the referendum dollar amount for Kane and McHenry County will be the same on your property tax bill. The following is the question as it will appear on the November 4th ballot.		The changes to recent Illinois referendum laws make the ballot question wordy and it may be confusing. For this reason, we have included a short explanation for each item below. Hopefully this information will help to explain what each section really means, and how it will affect you and your property tax bill.

“Shall the limiting rate under the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law for Huntley Area Public Library District, McHenry and Kane Counties, Illinois, be increased by an additional amount equal to 0.075% above the limiting rate for levy year 2007 and be equal to 0.24886% of the equalized assessed value of the taxable property therein for levy year 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011?” (Yes or No)		Shall the limiting rate be increased by an amount of 0.075% with a total rate for the operating fund of 0.24886 of the equalized assessed value of your taxable property for the years of 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011? The rate will stay the same for these four years but after that it can go down. It can not go above the 0.24886. (Yes or No) This is your actual vote. The remainder of the ballot wording is for your information only, and you do not vote on it.

(1) The approximate amount of taxes extendable at the most recently extended limiting rate is $1,707,825, (Kane: $402,553) and the approximate amount of taxes extendable if the proposition is approved is $2,444,380 (Kane: $576,206).		The current amount of taxes the library receives annually from McHenry County residents is $1,707,825 and would be $2,444,380 if approved by voters. The current amount from Kane County residents is $402,553 and would be $576,206 if approved.

(2) For the 2008 levy year the approximate amount of the additional tax extendable against property containing a single family residence and having a fair market value at the time of the referendum of $100,000 is estimated to be $21.00.		The State uses the example that a $100,000 home would pay about $21/yr. This translates to a $250,000 home paying about $5/mo or $60/yr.

(3) Based upon an average annual percentage increase in the market value of such property of 3%, the approximate amount of the additional tax extendable against such property for the 2008 levy year is estimated to be $21.00, for the 2009 levy year is estimated to be $21.50, for the 2010 levy year is estimated to be $22.00 and for the 2011 levy year is estimated to be $23.00.		Based upon the possible increase of your home’s market value each year, a small annual increase in taxes you pay to the library could occur. The increase shown is estimated based on a $100,000 home. After the first four years the rate may actually drop based on increased property values in the library district, and new growth adding to the tax base.

(4) If the proposition is approved, the aggregate extension for levy years 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 will be determined by the limiting rate set forth in the proposition, rather than the otherwise applicable limiting rate calculated under the provision of the Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (commonly known as the Property Tax Cap Law).		If approved, the tax rate for these first four years would be set by the limiting rate of 0.24886 as stated above in the proposition. This rate would be level for the first four years. Under this law, the rate may actually drop after these first four years. The lower tax rate levied against a higher assessed value is to produce the same tax dollars for the library as shown in paragraph (1) above.

»

442 reads